it's a moment of history forjapan. for the first time in more than 200 years, a japanese emperor is about to abdicate. emperor akihito is set to formally give up his throne. a new era now begins with crown prince naruhito becoming the emperor. us deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, who appointed robert mueller to investigate links between russia and donald trump's campaign, is resigning his post. mueller‘s investigation did not establish evidence that trump's campaign illegally conspired with the russian government. and this video is trending on bbc.com. a beluga whale has been found off norway's coast wearing a special russian harness. it's believed to have been trained by the russian navy. the harness had a camera holder with a label sourcing it to st petersburg.

now on bbc news: hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk, i'm stephen sackur. just days ago, hopes were high that a peace deal to end afghanistan's long war might be in sight. talks involving the us, the taliban and the afghan government representatives were to take place in qatar but they didn't happen. the taliban objected the delegation coming from kabul and a familiar cycle of of recrimination and violence resumed. my guest is mohammad umer daudzai, president ghani's peace envoy. what will it take to bring peace to afghanistan?

mohammad umer daudzai in kabul, welcome to hardtalk. thank you, stephen. let's start with those peace talks that were supposed to happen in qatar. the whole world was watching and waiting and then they didn't happen. what went wrong? it was supposed to be the first intra—afg han dialogue, not negotiation. sort of breaking the ice to get familiar to each other, and because of the complexities of the past and some weaknesses on both sides, more on the side

of the host, it didn't happen. but hopefully it will resume soon. the process will resume soon. let's just go into a little more detail. the taliban, out of qatar, said that the problem was that you had tried to load the kabul delegation to be sent to these talks, loaded with officials, you'd wanted to send more than 200 people, the taliban said you were treating it like a wedding party. well, in everything in afghanistan, because we live within a constitution and we follow a democratic and inclusive process and it was because of ensuring inclusivity, the list got longer, because we wanted all sides within afghanistan, those who live under the flag of the islamic republic, should be represented. that's why the list got longer. and actually, we had got

information from the host that the numbers doesn't matter. it's the inclusivity and the will to talk and express, that's what matters. isn't the truth of this, that you were not keen on these talks in the first place. you have been very reluctant to join a process which began with the united states and mr trump's special envoy, zalmay khalilzad, having his own channel of negotiation with the taliban behind the backs of your government, and you have always been deeply suspicious and sceptical of this process. that's not quite true. when the us decided on talking to the taliban face—to—face, they discussed with the afghan government and the afghan political forces outside government, everybody gave them a green light

to go ahead and talk to the taliban. that's how it all started. when they made a bit of progress in understanding each other on at least two issues, the withdrawal and relationship with terrorism, the third issue that was the intra—afghan dialogue came up. that was supposed to happen. it will happen, but it's postponed. the fact is, we were preferring that the qatar dialogue take place after the loya jirga, but when the us side says that everything is sort of postponed, and they want the into afghan dialogue to take place soon, the afghan government agreed with them and they started the process, they put together a reconciliation leadership council to manage the process of putting

together the list of participants that will go to qatar but then the other side, the qataris sent us a list that they had crossed anyone even indirectly associated with the afghan government. well, that leads to my next question, and i don't want to spend too long on this because it is process rather than real substance, but it is important to figure out, when you say the talks at some point will happen, involving both the taliban and your government, are you happy for them to still take place under the auspices of the qatari government because you appear to be accusing the qataris of intruding in the process and knocking off the visa delegate list all of the representatives from your government so i'm struggling to see how you can regard the qataris as an honest broker, as a third party. to be honest with you, some political addresses

in afghanistan are not necessarily part of the government. their priority was not qatarfor the beginning of the intra—afghan dialogue but then because our partners were keen, they also agreed. afghan government was neutral. in fact, a qatari delegation visited kabul before the process started and president ghani told them they will change the sequence so the loya jirga would take place after qatar but because it didn't take place, we switched our priority back to loya jirga. well, you say these talks, and the world does regard these as very important, because as we have already established, for a very, very long time, there has been no direct talking between afghan government officials and senior

taliban representatives, so it really matters, but it seems to me if one looks at the situation right now, both the diplomatic and military situations, it is the taliban that holds the cards. would you agree with that? well, in a sense, the taliban are not yet agreeing to meet face—to—face with the afghan government or to enter talks in negotiation with the afghan government. if you put it that way, yes, they are holding the cards. i suppose i'm thinking more that the taliban clearly understand something fundamental about the american position. the americans matter a great deal to this, not least because they have 1a,000 troops on the ground still supporting your government but it is quite plain today that donald trump wants to get those

troops out of afghanistan as soon as possible and the taliban know that very well and can exploit that. you know, the taliban were always claiming they are fighting because afghanistan is occupied by the us, so now they are sitting down with the us, they should have agreed to a ceasefire at least but they are not agreeing to a ceasefire proposal against us and against the afghan government. as far as the us were to withdraw troops, we don't have any particular issue with that but the troops withdrawal should take place after the end of the war or at least an agreement on the prolonged ceasefire. yeah, but donald trump made it plain, and made it plain that the end of last year, that he fully intends to draw down troop numbers from 1a,000 down to maybe 7,000, ie to reduce it by half,

within the next few months. that's what we expect to see. how vulnerable is that going to leave your afghanistan national army? numbers doesn't matter. president 0bama wanted to zero it by the end of 2016 but it didn't happen. what is important for us as the prolonged partnership with the us. and us support in terms of finances, enabling us into the andsf. i'm pretty sure because i once was minister of the interior, the andsf can take care of the country's interests provided the partnership with us and allies continue. let's look at the facts. first of all, just to finish the thought about the americans and the reliability of their support for you, you know now that since 2001, the us reckons it spent close to $1 trillion on its operations in afghanistan.

that is not sustainable and it is not going to continue. do you accept that? yes, at the peak, they were spending over $100 billion a year, but now their contribution to andsf is about $5 billion, so i think they can afford and also the afghan economy is supposed to come up. and the nato secretary—general statement, that they will stay in afghanistan at least until peace and a ceasefire come there. with respect, they are losing faith in the ability of the ashraf ghani government to represent and deliver a secure country. if one looks at the most recent us, this is us analysis of the security situation, the office of the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction concluded that the afghan government control of territory

has fallen to just 56% of the country's districts. this is a record low and the afghan national security forces casualties have risen to a record high. ie, you're losing the war. not really. if you compare this year, march, april with last year, march, april, the figure of casualties is much lower on the andsf side and each year in the past, and these two months, taliban will secure advances. this year, they failed to secure any advance and in fact, they have faced setbacks so the real situation is that andsf on the battlefield is doing very well. i don't know how you can sit there and sound so sanguine and so confident. look again at the figures, nearly 4,000 afghan civilians killed in 2018 and if we look back over the last five years, you've lost 115,000 members of your security forces, that's partly why desertion rates are so very high.

you are in no position it seems to me to be confident that without continued us support, you can hold the line against the taliban and the taliban know that. i think this year, reality is changing. the casualty rate is lower compared to this time last year and the taliban's stamina to fight face—to—face against the afghan national security forces, it's much lower compared to last year.

it's politically that they are pushed to a high level. that's because of the us—taliban talks which naturally boosted their political position. the battlefield is not matching their political position. politically, your problem isn'tjust the taliban of this major boost because they're now direct negotiation, communication, with senior figures in the american administration, the other political reality is, your president, ashraf ghani, a man who you used to criticise until he gave you a job, ashraf ghani is deeply unpopular amongst many afghans and that is a huge problem for the credibility of your government. i don't think we can claim that. i think the election is just five months away and the election will prove who is popular and who is not popular. interesting you say the election is five months away, the election should be in may. ashraf ghani should be out of his term of office in may.

many afghans believe that if he continues beyond may, he has no mandate, no legitimacy. we live within a constitutional system and the supreme court has given a verdict that he can continue until the next election produces a new president. here are the words of hekmat khalil karzai, whom i'm sure you know well, the former deputy foreign minister. he wrote this in foreign policy magazine recently. "the government of ashraf ghani has alienated and sidelined the overwhelming majority of senior afghan politicians because it has not included them in major policy making decisions, it has failed to improve security and economic conditions and the security conditions have worsened." that is the view of a very senior, and it has to be said, a man who was loyal to the government for

a long time, official. well, if one person's view matters, then until a few months ago, as you said, i was a critic of president ghani but then i realised that his doors are open and he is committed to inclusivity. crosstalk. if i may, i don't mean to sound rude but he bought you off with a job. no, i didn't need that in that sense, i needed a role to play in the peace process, and thanks that he gave me because peace is a priority for me and this is very close to my heart and to the heart of all afghans. so i am the main player within the whole peace process and that's an honour for me that he has given. the principle of inclusivity, he has applied inclusivity, that's why his doors were open for me to get in. if he's serious about inclusivity and you've used that word many times

in this interview as a means to get to a better future for afghanistan, why, after may, when his initial term runs out, does he not leave power and allow a national unity administration to be created in the interim before new presidential elections? that is an interim government that could be truly inclusive? there is no word in the constitution about an interim government. he has to abide by the verdict of the supreme court and the supreme court provided the interpretation of the constitution. here's the words again, i'm quoting to you senior people in your country. mohammad hanif atmar, a former national security adviser. he thinks ghani has no mandate to go on beyond may. he says, "we must support

a caretaker government which on the 21st of may should take over because this current government will have a mandate that has ended and given his record, we are much better off without afg hani". —— ashraf ghani. if i am free to have an opinion, his views are electoral. it's a campaigning view and i think it's against the constitution. what's going to happen next in afghanistan? the peace process, if we can call it that, is now in limbo once again. you're talking about this grand loya jirga, a peace jirga which you say is going to happen in the next few days but what can it possibly achieve if the conflict in your country is as deep as ever? for peace to come we need development in three layers. internationally, which there, regional co—ordination

and cooperation we are building but the most important one is the national consensus. the loya jirga is the best and the most afghanised mechanism to build that national consensus about peace. it is supposed to provide a framework for talks with the taliban. it is also supposed to identify mechanisms of reaching a sustainable peace in the country. but mr daudzai, nobody seems to buy it inside afghanistan. i'm thinking about the chief executive of your own government who's supposed to be working in partnership with ashraf ghani, abdullah abdullah, he says he's going to boycott the loya jirga. he doesn't believe it will achieve anything. same with presidential candidate shahab hakimi, he says he's going to boycott it too, so where on earth is it going to go? loya jirga is about

grassroots level leaders. leaders coming from districts, from villages, from provinces. there have been huge struggles across the country, everybody trying to get in to become a member of the loya jirga. this is going to be the most representative loya jirga of our history. the biggest loya jirga of our history. all districts, including those that are controlled by taliban, will have representation in the loya jirga. they are on their way to arrive in kabul. already one third of the members have arrived and the rest are arriving tomorrow. this loya jirga is about a national consensus. it's not about the top leaders consensus. to build top leaders‘ consensus that there are other mechanisms such as the reconciliation leadership council. that is supposed to bring top leaders‘ consensus. not loya jirga, loya jirga is a national consensus,

it's grassroots level consensus. listening to you, mr daudzai, i'm tempted to think afghanistan is a vibrant democracy in rude, good health, and of course, the reality is entirely different. your country is utterly divided, half of it is in control of the taliban and if one looks at one of the other fundamentals of afghanistan, you remain one of the most corrupt countries on earth and the afghan public is very well aware that ashraf ghani, for all of his promises to root out corruption, has overseen a administration just as, if not more, corrupt than the ones that went before. this isn't the vibrant democracy you're talking about. we are building democracy in the middle of a war, a war that has continued for a0 years. we are building democracy in the middle of the huge flow of aid that came to the country,

but we still appreciate that aid that the international community provided. the present may have a lot of questions but i am sure my country's future is bright. we have always remained together, united, and we will remain together and united and we will find an intra—afghan solution soon. of course, the country is not united, it's absurd to claim it's united, it's deeply divided. that's why we've seen war for the last 20 years. i put it to you that the war will only come to the end when people like you explicitly say yes, the taliban is going to have a very significant role in the future of governance in afghanistan. are you prepared to say that to me now? yes, of course, the taliban, aside being a militant force, they are a political group also. they have every right to be part

of the political system in the future. so you are prepared to say here and now, yes, foreign forces, led by the united states, must leave our country. we must give the taliban a role in the politics of the future of our country and that is something that you will commit to? i would say that yes, the international forces might leave one day when the right time comes... crosstalk. with respect, that's not good enough. the taliban call you and your government a "puppet regime", they say you're being propped up by foreign forces and they say that afghanistan can only be truly free and find a free political future when those forces leave. well, from the day i have come to the high peace council, i have established a culture of respecting each other,

so no matter what language the taliban use against us and against government, i will use the language of respect to them. i consider them afghans and i welcome them and i work for that, that they become part of a larger political system because that's their right. however, i would advise them than to get there there are other ways than war and violence. violence may not get them where negotiations can get them. can 2019 be the year of peace for afghanistan? there were high hopes that it might be just a short while ago. can it be? yes, i have already declared that in december last year, in london, i declared that. and i'm still claiming that the significant beginning of a meaningful peace will start this year. we have to end there but mohammad umer daudzai,

i thank you very much forjoining us on hardtalk. pleasure, thank you. hello there. we are likely to see warmer weather over the eastern parts of the uk over the next few days. there was more cloud around yesterday around the south of england. it was fairly thin. we have clear skies right now. further west we have this weather front sneaking in, it's going to bring some patchy rain and drizzle but it is moving very slowly into that area

of high pressure. for many parts it is still dry by the morning. temperatures in the clearer skies dipping away to 3—5. we have some sunshine or northern scotland. patchy rain coming into the father west of scotland. for england and wales, we are yet to see any rain crossing the sea, some mist and fog patches crossing eastern england, we should see decent spells of sunshine. you can see how slowly this rain pushes over the irish sea into some western coasts, into scotland, perhaps, but ahead of it, some sunshine. 18 or 19 in the midlands. as we move into the evening and overnight, again this patchy rain is pushing its way further into wales, to the south—west of england, to the north—west of england and further into scotland as well. more cloud putting into more of the country means it should be quite as chilly, temperatures 7—9.

this zone of cloud elsewhere, though, producing showers at this stage and they could be rather hit and miss. but with more cloud in general, even for eastern areas, it won't be quite as warm as tuesday. looking at thursday, we've still got this fairly cloudy picture. there will be some showers developing, potentially thundery. more significant, though, that weather front could provide some patchy rain moving southwards. it's what's happening to the north that is more crucial because if you follow the wind arrows, our wind from the arctic. otherwise the winds will not be too strong.

but they will turn colder everywhere by the end of the week before temperatures recoverjust a little bit as we head into the weekend.

i'm mariko 0i in tokyo. the headlines: emperor akihito is to formally give up his throne, the first japanese emperor to step down in more than 200 years. a new era is set to begin as his heir, crown prince naruhito, prepares to ascend the chrysanthemum throne. i'm kasia madera in london. also in the programme: us deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, who appointed robert mueller to investigate links between russia and donald trump's presidential campaign, resigns. islamic state releases a new video. if it is authentic, it will be the first time its leader,